literaturefandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Superdadsuper
|} Books of the Bible Hello. Sorry about the delay in responding to you. I can't say that we have any set rules as far as literary criticism is concerned. It's not something I've really touched upon in any articles I've ever written. I don't see any reason why articles here shouldn't be similar to those on Biblicalapedia (but not identically worded, all material here should be original). I think it would be good to include a summary of each book. I would say that articles about the Bible should be written from a neutral point of view, you should neither say that the events happened or didn't happen, just say that's what the Bible says. Really, you should just get started. I check all edits that are made to this wiki and read all new articles. If there's anything that's not right for this wiki, I'll just change it. I don't think there's much chance of you getting help from other users here. As I said, I'm really not interested in doing it. This wiki isn't a particularly active one either. Apart from me, only two other logged-in users have edited here in the past year. I also don't really want to launch any kind of official Bible project here. It could give visitors to this wiki the wrong impression. I think the best thing for you to do is to start by adding "red links" to our Bible page for each of its books. I should say that you might like to completely rewrite the Bible page. I'd be glad if you did. The page is so badly written that it's pretty much incomprehensible. It was largely written by a native speaker of Spanish and is full of all kinds of mistakes. Don't hesitate to contact me if I can be of any further assistance. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 10:29, October 20, 2014 (UTC) :I specifically asked you to write Bible articles from a neutral point of view and not to say that the events described are undoubtedly historical. Sentences like, "Genesis is a book primarily of historical accounts of the world, its origins as well as many important starting events" go directly against what i asked you to do. Leaving aside the fact that many Jews and Christians do not take Genesis literally, this is not a religious wiki and expressing a personal religious point of view is not welcome here. Please be more careful in future. :Also I would like all Biblical articles to have "book of...", "Gospel of>>>" etc. in the title. I have moved your article to Book of Genesis. please look at the changes I have made and follow the norms of this wiki in the future. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 11:46, October 24, 2014 (UTC) ::Apology accepted. ::I now approve of your guidelines for editing articles on Books of the Bible. One thing that I should add is that the section should not be headed "External Links" but "External links" with a lower case l. That's how we write section headings here, only the first word is capitalized. ::I really don't think that there's any scope for adding links to Literature Wikia from Biblicalpedia. I wouldn't worry about it. It's not important. ::As far as addressing authorship goes, that's easy. I would write, "It is traditionally attributed to ... but this has been disputed", or better yet, "It is traditionally attributed to ... but many modern scholars believe ..." ::Best wishes, Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 08:29, October 26, 2014 (UTC) :::I've added more about how Christians would see Jesus as fitting into the line of prophets myself, from a neutral point of view. Of course, you can change it. But so can I. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 11:55, November 6, 2014 (UTC)